Two musicians of this era I do love are Louis Armstrong and Nat Cole - both virtuosos in their own right. Everyone I think knows how important Armstrong is - Nat Cole kinda gets a short shrift - he was probably the best jazz pianist of his generation, but is remembered today for his vocals (which are good in their own right) - but not where he sparkled -
Nat Cole died at only 45(!), his brothers each lived another 30-40 years - I wonder what we would have gotten from him had he not died so young. He had many of the same political issues Louis Armstrong did, was seen as an appeaser on racial issues.
Nat just had such a distinctive and beautiful voice, it's so warm. I love his recording of "Almost Like Being In Love," which plays at the end of Groundhog Day. If you listen to another version, like for example Sinatra's... it's just not the same! Ella's is pretty nice though.
Part of how he got that sound was hotboxing several cigarettes in a row before going into record - the the depth, harmonics and warmth of his voice is in part from smoking.
You can really hear the difference between say his late 40's recordings and his late 50's ones.
I've heard and read of several vocalists whose sounds were credited (by them or others) to smoking. I think those effects vary quite a bit between singers.
For me, anything I smoked always affected my singing worse overall in the long run. I may have gotten a temporary effect I liked, but it reduced the total amount of time I could sing without losing strength in at least part of my range.
I almost feel worse for those it doesn't affect so badly, because it was a key reason I decided to quit.
He also carries the soundtrack for the semi musical western Cat Ballou, released the year he died (1965), and, to me, without his role the movie doesn't win any awards.
> Riccardi took a breath. “OK. You can name a thousand great instrumentalists or you can name a thousand great vocalists, but he’s the only person you could find who changed the way people played their instruments and the way people sang. Louis does that in a four-year period in the 1920s; by 1930, if you aren’t playing or singing like him, you’re out of work.
Anyone got a pointer to something (a Youtube video, probably?) that illustrates this? Specifically, the transformation of popular playing and singing in response to Armstrong. Like a before/after thing that demonstrates what Riccardi means here.
Here's [West End Blues](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4WPCBieSESI&pp=ygUVIldlc3QgR...) from 1928 by Armstrong. Each instrumentalist is showing a _lot_ more technicality in their solos, and the solos are much longer and more isolated. That's one of the big keys -- instrumentalists soloing on their own while the band backs them.
Now let's go forward 20 years to Dizzy Gillespie [Salt Peanuts](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gg1Wl-NmzWg&pp=ygUhZGl6enkgZ...). I think it's clear how Louie inspired _so much_ of what Gillespie and the orchestra are doing here. That would go on to morph so many ways over the next 60 years.
Hope that helps. I'm no expert -- just a guy who went to school for music and played trumpet, listened to a lot of Armstrong.
Thanks a bunch for putting this together, that clears things up a lot. I figured they meant more than just a more-fluent swing, and yeah, it's a lot more than that.
I don’t remember if it was called out explicitly but there’s a fantastic documentary out now on AppleTV+ about Louis Armstrong. If you have a subscription, I highly recommend watching it!
This is a good opportunity to tell a family story involving Louis Armstrong.
My uncle was the founder of Topper Toys and Deluxe Toys, in the 60s and 70s. He was a very interesting, very difficult genius. A holocaust survivor, toy inventor, world class poker player, decent sculptor, ping pong player and chess player. He made and lost several fortunes, and died very wealthy. He is credited with turning poker into a mass audience spectator sport, and he was a philanthropist.
One of Topper's dolls in the 60s was Suzy Cute. And he got Louis Armstrong to do a commerical. You have to see this. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KkConPs9tKQ. The best minute you will spend today, guaranteed.
My uncle had a photo hanging on his wall, from the day of the shooting of that commercial. My uncle is visible from behind, his arms splayed, clearly agitated. He is arguing with Louis Armstrong, facing the camera, also agitated. My uncle is telling Louis Armstrong how to sing the Suzy Cute song, and Louis Armstrong is not having it.
no, not the doll, I saw the "Suzy Cute song" part. The Suzie Q is a dance move from the 1930s (or maybe even older) and quite a few songs have referenced it or included it in the title, the most well-known one is probably Lil Hardin Armstrong's one.
this is why I asked whether it was referring to that or something else
Ah apologies, I missed the thrust of your question but surely the doll's name is just a play on words meant to evoke the nickname "Suzie Q," which was fairly popular once upon a time, back when people commonly named their little girls Susan. As to which came first, the nickname or the dance step, I doubt there's any ironclad attestation for that (although I did find an old book from 1901 where someone had named their cow Susie Q), but anyway since trendy dance steps are most often named after something else, and not just given monikers ex nihilo, my guess is the nickname came first.
Can you recommend an appropriate forum for discussing HN's guidelines?
In this particular case, I thought the GP comment raised a point worth discussing somewhere. I.e.:
At least on mobile, there's a point where the signal-to-noise ratio (from ads and/or wordy writing) is so low that I'd rather just read a summary here on HN.
So I'm actually grateful for comments that warn me before I visit such articles, especially on mobile.
It's not that such comments have no benefit—but they cost more than they benefit. That's why we have that rule. The site would be worse, on the whole, without it.
And of course the annoyances are genuine. We all find them annoying. It's just that complaints about them don't make for curious conversation, and that's what we're optimizing for.
When you click a link labelled "world's fluffiest pancakes", do you want to read 16 boring pages of stories about someone's grandma before you get to, you know, the thing you actually clicked on?
Now that's interesting because every set of instructions I've seen is to not over mix the batter. That it should be even a bit lumpy. I guess it builds up the gluten. I do suggest letting the batter sit for some time (10-15 minutes). That helps.
My favorite buttermilk style pancakes are from Corner Bakery. Just hit all the right notes for me, but I can't seem to make them at home. Hot, fluffy, a little chewy. Super yummy.
At home, the Bisquick in a bottle mix is actually quite good, it's just so much batter in one bottle we rarely make it. We have another mix we use that's decent. It even better with buttermilk. My home experiments haven't been amazing enough to make them worth the bother over a pre-made mix.
...and I should shut up, this is about Louis Armstrong. I don't even know if he liked pancakes.
My brother always made inch-thick pancakes with the texture of a cloud. Dad spoiled the mystery, "you're over-mixing the batter," but we disagreed: they're lovely that way.
If you separate the egg whites and whip separately before folding into batter, you'll get even fluffier, ...I don't have proof these are the fluffiest, though.
The full quote in context was: "You can name a thousand great instrumentalists or you can name a thousand great vocalists, but he’s the only person you could find who changed the way people played their instruments and the way people sang. Louis does that in a four-year period in the 1920s; by 1930, if you aren’t playing or singing like him, you’re out of work."
More importantly though, Armstrong's influence on instrumentals alone was far broader than Hendrix (who mostly affected how electric guitars were approached in pop music, and a little bit beyond) Hendrix is a giant, absolutely, but not in the same league.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1RcoUfSAUWs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbwPKIPVcPw
Nat Cole died at only 45(!), his brothers each lived another 30-40 years - I wonder what we would have gotten from him had he not died so young. He had many of the same political issues Louis Armstrong did, was seen as an appeaser on racial issues.